Justia Georgia Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

By the terms of the original decree of divorce, James and Julie Taylor were to share joint legal custody of their two children. James was to have primary physical custody of the children, and Julie was to pay a certain amount each month to James as child support. Less than three months after the entry of the original decree, James filed a petition to modify it, alleging that circumstances had changed, and seeking sole legal custody of the children, as well as more child support. The trial court granted the modification, awarded sole legal custody to James, and increased the amount that Julie was to pay James as child support. The trial court also awarded James attorney fees. In Case No. S13A0911, Julie appealed modification of the decree; in Case No. S13A0912, Julie appealed the award of attorney fees. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed both cases. View "Taylor v. Taylor" on Justia Law

The State appealed the trial court's grant of a motion for new trial on the ground that the evidence was legally insufficient for the jury to convict appellee Marcus Jackson of murder and related charges for the death of the victim Brandon Horton. Because the trial court was reviewing the legal sufficiency of the evidence pursuant to "Jackson v. Virginia," (443 U.S. 307 (1979)) and not pursuant to OCGA 5-5-21, the trial court was not acting as the Òthirteenth jurorÓ and could not weigh the evidence or otherwise exercise itÕs own discretion. Rather, the Supreme Court applied the standard of review as listed in "Manuel v. Georgia,"(711 SE2d 676) (2011)). Applying this standard, the Supreme Court reversed. View "Georgia v. Jackson" on Justia Law

John Huscusson died leaving three adult daughters as heirs of his estate: Tina Banner, Deborah Vandeford and Karen Nee. In his will, Huscusson specifically revoked his previous will, which had been executed in 2006 and had provided that Huscusson's daughters were to share equally in the estate. The 2012 will named Banner as executrix. It provided that Huscusson was "extremely disappointed" in Vandeford and Nee and that each of them was to receive a specific bequest in the amount of $10. Banner was not given a specific bequest. Vandeford and Nee filed a declaratory judgment action seeking an interpretation of the will. Following a hearing, the probate court determined that the will was plain and unambiguous; that it did not contain a residue clause; and that, therefore, the lapsed gift of the residue must pass by intestacy. Banner appealed and after review, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Banner v. Vandeford" on Justia Law

The Atlanta Independent School System (APS) and the Atlanta Board of Education deducted a $38.6 million unfunded pension liability expense before calculating the amount of local revenue funds to be distributed to start-up charter schools within APS. The stated purpose for the change in funding was APSÕs need to pay down a large, unfunded pension liability for current and former APS employees that has been accruing since the 1980s. In response, start-up charter schools filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel appellants4 to distribute local revenue to the start-up charter schools without any deduction for APSÕs unfunded pension liability. The trial court granted the requested mandamus relief, finding the statutory funding formula set out by statute did not authorize appellants to subtract the $38.6 million from its calculation of local revenue. Finding no error in the trial court's grant of mandamus relief, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Atlanta Independent School System v. Atlanta Neighborhood Charter School, Inc." on Justia Law

Following the denial of his motion for new trial, Jerome Allen appealed his convictions and sentences for malice murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. His sole challenge was that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Finding no merit to Allen's contention, the Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentences. View "Allen v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Appellant Beth Ann Muse was tried by jury and convicted of murder and the unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, both stemming from the fatal shooting of her husband, Mark. At trial, Appellant admitted that she killed Mark, but she argued that the killing was justified. On appeal to the Supreme Court, she contended she was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed her conviction. View "Muse v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Plaintiff William Zeagler was employed by the defendant Norfolk Southern Railway Company when he was injured on the job: the train on which he was working collided with a logging truck at a grade crossing. He sued Norfolk Southern under the Federal EmployersÕ Liability Act (FELA), claiming that the railroad negligently failed to train him on how to avoid or mitigate injury in the event of a grade-crossing collision. The trial court granted summary judgment to Norfolk Southern after concluding that the railroad had no duty to train its employees on what to do when a grade-crossing collision is imminent. The Court of Appeals reversed that judgment. Two issues were presented to the Supreme Court on appeal: (1) whether the Court of Appeals erred in reversing the trial courtÕs order granting summary judgment in favor of Norfolk Southern; and (2) whether ZeaglerÕs failure-to-train claim was preempted or precluded by Federal Railroad Administration regulations. The Supreme Court concluded that the answer to both questions was no. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the appellate court's order. View "Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Zeagler" on Justia Law

Appellant Valerie Carey pled guilty, under a negotiated plea agreement, to all counts in a 13-count indictment that charged her and her husband with malice murder and other crimes in connection with the death of their daughter. In pleading guilty, Carey avoided the death sentence and received life with the possibility of parole for murder, plus concurrent terms of imprisonment for the other offenses that did not merge. Carey subsequently sought and was granted the right to file an out-of-time appeal, and now claiming that her plea was invalid because it was not entered knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. Because the record on its face did not support Carey's challenge to her guilty plea, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Carey v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Loviet Edwards was tried by jury and convicted of two murders in connection with the killings of Tykiah Palmer and her unnamed baby, among other crimes. Edwards appealed, arguing the trial court erred when it admitted a prior statement of a witness, and when it admitted certain photographs of the victims. After careful consideration of the trial court record, the Supreme Court concluded the trial court did not err when it admitted this evidence, and accordingly affirmed. View "Edwards v. Georgia" on Justia Law

Raymon Napoleon Walton was tried by jury and convicted of murder, kidnapping with bodily injury, and theft by taking, all in connection with the death of Alkenyatta Wilson. He appealed, contending that the State failed to prove that Harris County was the proper venue. Walton also claimed that the trial court erred when it gave a preliminary charge to the jury and when it denied his motion for mistrial. Upon its review of the record and briefs, the Supreme Court found no error and affirmed. View "Walton v. Georgia" on Justia Law